Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Report
Authorship
This document was written by:
Ian Twomey
Phone: +64 4 471 1109 or +64 21 688 409, e-mail:
ian@haletwomey.co.nz
Tim Labett
Phone: +64 4 439 0268 or +64 21 436 146, e-mail:
tim.labett@aurecongroup.com
Please phone or e-mail for further information.
Disclaimer
Hale & Twomey Limited, its contributors and employees shall not be liable for any loss
or damage sustained by any person relying on this report, whatever the cause of such
loss or damage.
www.haletwomey.co.nz
Executive Summary
Facilities for emergency liquid fuel storage are usually large scale in order to hold the
volumes required to provide a reasonable level of supply security. This report updates
work done in the National Energy Security Assessment (NESA) Identified Issues:
Australia's International Energy Oil Obligation (2012 Report) on the options and costs
for large scale emergency stock holdings including the facility cost, the stock cost and
the operational costs to keep the facility and stock in an appropriate state of
readiness.
Emergency stocks can be held in above ground storage terminals, permanent floating
storage facilities, or underground caverns (either natural or constructed). This report
investigates four options for storage in detail; three above ground scenarios and one
permanent floating storage facility. Permanent floating storage refers to a purpose
built facility, not oil tankers moored together. Underground caverns are not
investigated in detail in this report.
Scenari
o
Facility
Size
(million
litres)
Stock
200
Product
480
Crude
500
Product
1,000
Crude
The sizes for scenarios 2, 3 and 4 are set where the benefits of economies of scale
have been captured smaller terminals will cost more per litre of storage, whereas
larger terminals will have a similar cost per litre
Figure 1 shows the capital costs for each facility per cubic metre (000 litres). The cost
of the stock makes up over 60% of the total cost. In terms of facility cost, there is not
much difference in the cost per unit of storage between the larger tank farms and
permanent floating storage. The smaller expansion terminal is more expensive as it
is not large enough to capture all the scale benefits.
Hale & Twomey: Final Australia's Emergency Liquid Fuel Stockholding Update 2013: Oil Storage Options &
Costs
These capital costs are lower per unit cost than a normal commercial terminal
development. This is due to the large scale involved, and because many of the
features of a commercial terminal such as tank wagon loading gantries are not
required. These estimates do not include related infrastructure such as jetties, wharf
lines and links into utilities (e.g. roads, power and water). In order to keep these costs
down, the facilities should be located relatively close to existing infrastructure (e.g.
use existing jetties, etc.).
Figure 2 shows the annual cost per storage unit (m3) assuming a 7% rate of return on
the capital, together with the land and operational costs. Providing a return on the
capital required to build the storage facility and buy the stock makes up
approximately 85% of the total cost (as shown in the red and green components in
Figure 2). Product storage is more expensive as the cost of purchasing the product is
about 10% more than crude along with higher operational costs to keep product to
specification (to maintain quality).
Figure 2: Emergency storage costs per year (@ 7% return on capital)
The charts highlight that emergency stocks are a very capital intensive investment. In
order to provide emergency stocks at the lowest possible ongoing cost they need to
be implemented in a way where the return expected on the capital is as low as
possible.
Hale & Twomey: Final Australia's Emergency Liquid Fuel Stockholding Update 2013: Oil Storage Options &
Costs
The size of the facilities investigated in this report is substantial. Previous industry
consultation has noted there has not been construction of storage facilities on this
scale in Australia since refinery construction in the 1950s.
Hale & Twomey: Final Australia's Emergency Liquid Fuel Stockholding Update 2013: Oil Storage Options &
Costs
Table of Contents
Executive Summary....................................................................................i
Glossary.................................................................................................... 1
1.0
Introduction.....................................................................................2
2.0
Background.....................................................................................4
3.0
Methodology....................................................................................6
3.1
Scope of Work.................................................................................................... 6
3.2
3.3
Approach............................................................................................................ 7
4.0
4.1
Physical stockholding......................................................................................... 8
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.5
Location selection............................................................................................11
5.0
5.1
5.2
5.3
Oil stock........................................................................................................... 16
5.4
Construction timing.......................................................................................... 16
5.5
6.0
6.1
6.2
Turnover costs..................................................................................................18
6.3
Land costs........................................................................................................ 19
6.4
7.0
Cost summary................................................................................20
Hale & Twomey: Final Australia's Emergency Liquid Fuel Stockholding Update 2013: Oil Storage Options &
Costs
Hale & Twomey: Final Australia's Emergency Liquid Fuel Stockholding Update 2013: Oil Storage Options &
Costs
Glossary
Annual cost
bbl
Collective action
Commingled stocks
Commercial stocks
Emergency stocks
IEP Agreement
Import mix
kt
Mega-Float
Operating cost
Stock out
Where normal market demand is not fully met such that there
is disruption to the customer supply.
Hale & Twomey: Final Australia's Emergency Liquid Fuel Stockholding Update 2013: Oil Storage Options &
Costs
1.0 Introduction
This report updates the work on emergency liquid fuel storage from the National
Energy Security Assessment (NESA) Identified Issues: Australias International Energy
Oil Obligation report (2012 Report) produced by Hale & Twomey (H&T) for the then
Department of Resources, Energy and Tourism in 2012. In developing four options that
Australia could use to hold emergency stock, the report included calculations on the
cost of building storage facilities and holding physical stock, both crude and product,
in Australia.
The 2012 report and a follow up report, Stock on the Water Analysis (2013), found
that within Australia, the options for emergency physical storage are expensive, and
that:
Australia and New Zealand have no such facilities [i.e. large storage capacity]
in-country or any nearer than Singapore which is an 8-14 day voyage from the
manufacturing locations in Australia and a 16 day voyage from New Zealand.
Australia [and New Zealand] can also be characterised as concentrated demand
centres that are spread around the country but isolated from each other. Unlike
North America or Europe there is no pipeline network linking these centres (or
barge trade as in Europe). The road distances are also substantial meaning road
transport cannot be relied upon to manage disruption. With few internal links,
this limits the attractiveness of storing oil on land in all likelihood it will not be
where it will be required.1
The current petroleum storage facilities in Australia are used by commercial operators
to either supply the market, or export Australian production. Therefore if Australia is to
store significant quantities of emergency stock in-country, new dedicated storage
facilities will be required. The aim of this auxiliary report is to investigate the cost of
storage options within Australia in more detail, both for above ground (tank farm) and
permanent floating storage.
For above ground storage, new cost estimates specifically relating to emergency
storage have been developed. Analysis by the International Energy Agency (IEA)
showed that the cost of emergency storage terminals should be significantly cheaper
(per volume stored) than a normal operating terminal.
Permanent floating storage is a purpose built facility for storing petroleum on water,
not normal oil tankers moored for a period. This report investigates permanent
floating storage through a literature review.
Cavern space (either natural or constructed) is used for emergency fuel storage in
some countries, including Germany, South Korea, the United States and Singapore
this report provides some general information on the development of storage caverns
but does not investigate this for Australia, as this option is outside this papers terms
of reference.
1 Hale & Twomey; Stock on the Water Analysis report (2013), pg13
Hale & Twomey: Final Australia's Emergency Liquid Fuel Stockholding Update 2013: Oil Storage Options &
Costs
Information on holding stock in another country may be found in several other Hale &
Twomey reports, including the auxiliary report Australias Emergency Liquid Fuel
Stockholding Update 2013: Ticket Markets, and the Main Report 2013.
The size of the facilities investigated in this report are substantial and during the
consultation for the 2012 Report, industry noted there has not been construction of
storage facilities on this scale in Australia since refinery construction in the 1950s.
Industry also noted there is little excess storage capacity in the existing system,
although depending on the outcome of planned refinery conversions, this could be
improved slightly.. The extent and availability of assets which may not have justified
upgrading in the past but which could be brought into service for emergency stock, is
not known at this stage.
Hale & Twomey: Final Australia's Emergency Liquid Fuel Stockholding Update 2013: Oil Storage Options &
Costs
2.0 Background
Australia is a member of the IEA where, as a signatory to the Agreement on an
International Energy Program (the IEP Agreement), it benefits from the coordination
of crude oil and petroleum product supply in the event of a major disruption to
international oil markets. Under the IEP Agreement, member countries accepted a
treaty commitment to hold crude oil and petroleum product stocks equivalent to a
minimum of 90 days of the previous year's daily net import demand, and participate
in collective actions2 initiated by the IEA during a liquid fuel emergency.
In the last few years Australia has not achieved the minimum inventory obligation set
by the IEA. With local production of crude and condensate falling and petroleum
demand increasing, the commercial stocks held by market participants are no longer
sufficient to cover the minimum commitment which is based on 90 days of daily net
imports.
The IEA includes 28 member countries and was founded in response to the 1973/4 oil
crisis. The majority of members are in Europe as shown in Figure 3. Australia, Japan,
New Zealand and the Republic of Korea (South Korea) are the only IEA members in the
Asia-Pacific region.
Figure 3: IEA membership map
The majority of IEA member governments hold emergency stocks, although there are
a wide variety of approaches to holding physical stock and obtaining storage facilities.
Some governments have developed and own storage facilities; others lease storage
from the market and leave it to private providers to own and manage the facility. In
this case, storage facilities are normally secured through a tender process (which is
applicable for both existing and new facilities).
With regard to physical stock, most governments own the oil even if the storage is
leased, unless they devolve the obligation to hold stock to the petroleum industry
operating within the country. Even where industry is responsible for holding stock,
there is usually some approved central structure (e.g. stock agency) to ensure the
facilities and stock are developed and held in the most efficient way.
2 IEA collective actions cover a range of options including the joint release of stock as
an initial response to market disruption. Other responses include voluntary demand
restraint, fuel switching and surge production. The actions chosen are tailored to each
situation, involve widespread consultation and co-operation and can be instigated
rapidly.
Hale & Twomey: Final Australia's Emergency Liquid Fuel Stockholding Update 2013: Oil Storage Options &
Costs
Some IEA countries fund emergency stock from the general government budget,
particularly non-European countries. However, many of these countries established
reserves over a long period when petroleum prices were at lower levels. Direct funding
via a consumer levy is common in Europe, and most IEA countries tax petroleum in
some way. The levy provides an annual income stream to the government or stock
agency. Large upfront costs associated with initial fuel purchases are funded by loans
to the stock agency, which are repaid through the levy income.
This Report does not examine stock ownership and management options, or funding
mechanisms which are covered in the Main Report 2013. It is a factual and technical
paper (with costings based on an engineering analysis) to enhance and provide more
detailed estimates for the work completed in 2012 by Hale & Twomey.
Hale & Twomey: Final Australia's Emergency Liquid Fuel Stockholding Update 2013: Oil Storage Options &
Costs
3.0 Methodology
This report follows the requirements as laid out in the scope of work (3.1). The task
included obtaining an estimate from a suitable expert to provide engineering costings
for storage facilities. The 2012 Report used engineering cost estimates developed for
smaller scale terminals in New Zealand, adjusted to take account of the increased
scale and Australian costs and conditions. The new engineering estimates are
expected to be more accurate as they have been developed specifically for large
dedicated emergency storage, based on conceptual engineering designs and
associated itemised costings derived from actual Australian tank construction.
Engineering consultancy Aurecon was engaged to provide these estimates (3.2).
ii.
iii.
Storage on water: (a) permanent tanker storage; (b) stock on water (in transit,
de facto storage).
This report examines storage issues in Australia in relation to ii. Tank farms, and iii. (a)
Permanent tanker storage. Three or four generic (but based on real-world situation)
scenarios are focused on, and the following requirements are addressed:
Updated costs for tank farm construction, including storage for sole emergency
purposes, and storage for both emergency and commercial operations,
including estimates for associated infrastructure such as pipelines;
Updated costs for augmented facilities (added to existing), greenfield facilities
(new build), and identification and consideration of possible site specific and
other factors such as costs associated with geotechnics;
Discussion of options and costs obtained from available information for
permanent off-shore tanker storage, including possible suitable locations, and
associated infrastructure required; and
Updated costs should be able to be factored into modelling as required.
Hale & Twomey: Final Australia's Emergency Liquid Fuel Stockholding Update 2013: Oil Storage Options &
Costs
2.
3.
These three concepts have been chosen so that the likely range of options for
emergency storage are considered (large dedicated facilities that could hold either
crude or product) along with large expansion of existing product terminals (if the
stocks were to be dispersed around the country). Smaller terminal expansion is not
included as emergency storage facilities are expected to be reasonably large. Product
storage does not include jet fuel due to its quality requirements making long term
storage more difficult.
For the large terminals, an approximate volume of 500 million litres has been selected,
as above this point, costs are expected to increase proportionally with volume
increase (i.e. this terminal size has captured the scale benefits).
The cost estimates are for the storage tanks and the immediate related infrastructure
including tank foundation and compounds, piping, pumps, fire protection and
electrical and control equipment. Related infrastructure that may be required
depending on the site chosen such as connecting pipeline, jetties, wharflines and
connections to utilities (roads, power, water) is not included.
3.3 Approach
While more detailed engineering estimates have been developed for above ground
storage, permanent floating storage has been investigated using a desk top study,
researching available public information. Permanent floating storage facilities are
specifically designed for the long term storage of petroleum on water. Storing oil using
temporarily moored ships is not assessed as it would be unlikely to get approval as an
acceptable long term storage option.
Following development of the storage facility costs (for both above ground storage
and permanent floating storage), other costs such as stock, operational costs and
maintenance have been updated to provide fully built up costs for emergency storage.
The 2012 Report built up likely stock costs from an international crude benchmark
price (dated Brent of USD115/bbl). This report changes the methodology and uses
Australias actual import costs for crude and product in the 2011/12 year to establish
the cost of stock.
The IEA has recently reviewed costs for emergency storage4. These costs are
compared in Appendix 3.
Hale & Twomey: Final Australia's Emergency Liquid Fuel Stockholding Update 2013: Oil Storage Options &
Costs
All the new work has been done in Australian dollars reflecting Australian conditions.
Hale & Twomey: Final Australia's Emergency Liquid Fuel Stockholding Update 2013: Oil Storage Options &
Costs
Hale & Twomey: Final Australia's Emergency Liquid Fuel Stockholding Update 2013: Oil Storage Options &
Costs
For large volume, long term storage, underground storage (especially salt caverns) is
generally regarded as the cheapest form, although natural cavern storage is
dependent on the geology of the country. Due to product quality issues, underground
storage is usually only used for crude oil.
Floating storage can be (i) temporary, particularly where the market incentive to store
oil is greater than the cost of chartering a ship, or (ii) permanent, where purpose-built
facilities are developed to hold stock.
Holding oil in storage tanks (above ground storage) is the most common form of
petroleum storage and the only method currently used in Australia to hold petroleum
stocks. Emergency stock held as product is stored in tanks as it needs to be readily
accessible for regular turn over and replacement to maintain quality.
This report reviews both above ground storage and permanent floating storage for
applicability to Australia. There are some comments on the costs of underground
storage facilities in Appendix 2.
Hale & Twomey: Final Australia's Emergency Liquid Fuel Stockholding Update 2013: Oil Storage Options &
Costs
ii.
The specific costs are detailed in Section 5. Costs associated with stock release are
not included in the calculation of holding costs.
Advantage
Crude
Product
Disadvantages
5 While the land cost is derived from a capital cost, the analysis in this report converts
it to a lease cost and is therefore shown as an operating cost.
Hale & Twomey: Final Australia's Emergency Liquid Fuel Stockholding Update 2013: Oil Storage Options &
Costs
domestic refining
disruptions and possibly
domestic infrastructure
disruption
Hale & Twomey: Final Australia's Emergency Liquid Fuel Stockholding Update 2013: Oil Storage Options &
Costs
Hale & Twomey: Final Australia's Emergency Liquid Fuel Stockholding Update 2013: Oil Storage Options &
Costs
Cost estimate
(AUD millions)
Cost per m3
storage (AUD)
95
475
194
404
195
390
No.
Option
The concept plans used to develop the estimates were specific to emergency storage
for large volumes. They are considerably cheaper per unit stored than a normal
commercial tank farm, where the design would typically involve smaller tanks and a
lot of related distribution equipment (e.g. road tankwagon filling gantry and yard,
more complex pipework and automation, etc.).
The concepts were not developed for a particular site. Site selection can impact the
cost through local construction costs, ground conditions, land availability, distance
from wharf and related utility infrastructure costs (e.g. power, water and road
connections).
5.1.1
Site selection for the storage facility is important as it will influence the amount of
spending on supporting infrastructure. In the work the IEA has done on the costs and
benefits of stockholding (IEA report)8 they note, The expense of the necessary
infrastructure (loading platforms, piping) and the jetty if needed can amount to
almost two thirds of the overall construction costs of a storage facility.
These costs have not been included in the base estimate as what is needed depends
on site selection. If a site is selected close to existing facilities then only pipelines
between the facilities will be needed and the existing jetty infrastructure can be used.
The IEA paper gives a jetty cost of between USD25-40 million depending on the size of
a ship, although that cost can be substantially higher if dredging is required to make
the jetty and port suitable for oil tankers. For the 500,000 m3 tank farm (Scenario 3)
above this spend would increase the cost by at least 20%.
Hale & Twomey: Final Australia's Emergency Liquid Fuel Stockholding Update 2013: Oil Storage Options &
Costs
For wharflines, the pipes that connect the terminal to the jetty, Aurecon estimated this
cost to be AUD1.8 million per kilometre. The further the petroleum is pumped can also
affect both the rate it can be transferred and the size of the pumps needed.
Given the high cost of related infrastructure it would make sense to construct these
facilities relatively close to existing facilities (which could be both crude and
condensate producing and/or importing facilities for crude, or import facilities for
product).
5.1.2
The Aurecon report notes a number of site related factors that will influence the cost
estimate. The above estimates assume good ground conditions for tank foundations. If
the land requires ground improvement to be suitable for large storage tanks (e.g.
piling), this would add approximately 10% to the above estimate.
Requirements provided by legislation, and the related risk assessments, have an
impact on the design and therefore the cost. These requirements can vary between
states, and can include, for example, how Australian design codes are interpreted. In
general, the concept designs provided are conservative in relation to legislation and
risk assessment.
5.1.3
These storage facility cost estimates are around 10% lower than the estimates in the
2012 Report. Table 3 shows the updated cost estimate against those in the previous
report, the IEA Report and in Japanese work reviewed covering the permanent floating
storage and other strategic storage options (Japan/Vietnam study) 9. The updated
estimate, while very similar to the Japanese estimate, is still significantly higher than
the IEA cost estimate. This is discussed further in Appendix 3.
Table 3: Storage construction costs comparison with other studies
Estimate
USD/m3
This Report
2012 Report
IEA 2013
Japan 2012
40410
45511
182-233
397
Hale & Twomey: Final Australia's Emergency Liquid Fuel Stockholding Update 2013: Oil Storage Options &
Costs
The Japanese permanent floating storage facilities are referred to by their developers
as Mega-floats. These are specially built storage vessels (not ships) that are linked
together in a frame and moored to the seabed. They have been promoted by the
Japanese government and the companies involved for use in other areas including
Vietnam. Table 4 provides a summary of the Mega-Float system based on the Vietnam
project development.12
Table 4: Megafloat storage systems
Key
Characteristic
s
Location
Environment
and social
Economic
/Financial
Technical
feasibility
We note that Japan stores only crude in these facilities; the turnover requirements for
product would make it difficult to store product in such a facility (difficult due to the
cost of monitoring product quality, the size of the storage units and turnover
requirements).
5.2.1
Unlike the above ground storage estimate, the jetty for receiving and loading crude is
an integral part of the facility and has been included in the cost estimate. Associated
utilities have also been included although if the site was a long way from access to
utilities such as water and electricity there would be an additional cost to establish the
connections.
5.2.2
In the case of permanent floating storage the site selection is limited by the type of
marine environment required (sheltered deep water close to land). The actual cost is
likely to be specific to each site to some extent, especially the amount of reclamation
required and if any dredging is needed.
Given the sensitivities of storing petroleum, particularly in a marine environment, we
would expect the planning issues for such a proposal to be significant. No work has
been done on whether Australia has sites that might be suitable for such a facility or if
the concept would have a chance of gaining approval under Australias environmental
regulations.
Petroleum
Average cost
Average cost
(AUD/bbl)
(AUD/m3)
Crude
113.92
716.56
Products
125.15
787.19
Hale & Twomey: Final Australia's Emergency Liquid Fuel Stockholding Update 2013: Oil Storage Options &
Costs
While these storage facilities are much larger than most storage construction in
Australia over the past few decades, in practical terms, Aurecon advise that there are
a number of contractors capable of constructing the facilities. It would be feasible to
build some facilities concurrently if facilities were built in different states.
Alternatively, there may be cost advantages by staging construction in the same
region so the workforce requirements can be smoothed.
The Japan/Vietnam study gave an implementation time of five years for permanent
floating storage including site survey and design13.
Hale & Twomey: Final Australia's Emergency Liquid Fuel Stockholding Update 2013: Oil Storage Options &
Costs
Hale & Twomey: Final Australia's Emergency Liquid Fuel Stockholding Update 2013: Oil Storage Options &
Costs
Operating costs;
Maintenance costs;
Product quality management and stock turnover;
Land costs; and
Management and administration.
Hale & Twomey: Final Australia's Emergency Liquid Fuel Stockholding Update 2013: Oil Storage Options &
Costs
While acknowledging crude did not need to be turned over, the IEA paper only gave
an average cost for turnover of ~USD0.15/bbl/year rather than a separate one for
crude and product.
This paper continues to separate the cost for crude and product but based on the IEA
paper, reduces the turnover assumption for product to once every five years.
Therefore turnover cost assumptions are:
Crude
Product
Nil
USD0.40/bbl/year
Hale & Twomey: Final Australia's Emergency Liquid Fuel Stockholding Update 2013: Oil Storage Options &
Costs
Table 8 shows the total annual cost for each facility where the annual cost includes a
component providing a recovery on the capital spent along with the annual
operational costs. The recovery factor for the capital uses a 7% return for the base
case with variations shown for 3% and 10%. While emergency storage is a long term
strategic decision, as depreciation is included in the assumed return there is no
specific length of time in this analysis. Table 9 shows the total annual costs per unit
stored (for m3 and bbls).
Hale & Twomey: Final Australia's Emergency Liquid Fuel Stockholding Update 2013: Oil Storage Options &
Costs
Hale & Twomey: Final Australia's Emergency Liquid Fuel Stockholding Update 2013: Oil Storage Options &
Costs
Hale & Twomey: Final Australia's Emergency Liquid Fuel Stockholding Update 2013: Oil Storage Options &
Costs
Hale & Twomey: Final Australia's Emergency Liquid Fuel Stockholding Update 2013: Oil Storage Options &
Costs
Hale & Twomey: Final Australia's Emergency Liquid Fuel Stockholding Update 2013: Oil Storage Options &
Costs
Hale & Twomey: Final Australia's Emergency Liquid Fuel Stockholding Update 2013: Oil Storage Options & Costs
Page 1
Hale & Twomey: Final Australia's Emergency Liquid Fuel Stockholding Update 2013: Oil Storage Options & Costs
Page 2
Hale & Twomey: Final Australia's Emergency Liquid Fuel Stockholding Update 2013: Oil Storage Options & Costs
Page 3
Hale & Twomey: Final Australia's Emergency Liquid Fuel Stockholding Update 2013: Oil Storage Options & Costs
Page 4
Hale & Twomey: Final Australia's Emergency Liquid Fuel Stockholding Update 2013: Oil Storage Options & Costs
Page 5
Hale & Twomey: Final Australia's Emergency Liquid Fuel Stockholding Update 2013: Oil Storage Options & Costs
Page 6
Hale & Twomey: Final Australia's Emergency Liquid Fuel Stockholding Update 2013: Oil Storage Options & Costs
Page 7
Hale & Twomey: Final Australia's Emergency Liquid Fuel Stockholding Update 2013: Oil Storage Options & Costs
Page 8
Hale & Twomey: Final Australia's Emergency Liquid Fuel Stockholding Update 2013: Oil Storage Options & Costs
Page 9
Hale & Twomey: Final Australia's Emergency Liquid Fuel Stockholding Update 2013: Oil Storage Options & Costs
Page 10
Hale & Twomey: Final Australia's Emergency Liquid Fuel Stockholding Update 2013: Oil Storage Options & Costs
Page 11
Hale & Twomey: Final Australia's Emergency Liquid Fuel Stockholding Update 2013: Oil Storage Options & Costs
Page 12
Hale & Twomey: Final Australia's Emergency Liquid Fuel Stockholding Update 2013: Oil Storage Options & Costs
Page 13
Hale & Twomey: Final Australia's Emergency Liquid Fuel Stockholding Update 2013: Oil Storage Options & Costs
Page 14
Hale & Twomey: Final Australia's Emergency Liquid Fuel Stockholding Update 2013: Oil Storage Options &
Costs
Hale & Twomey: Final Australia's Emergency Liquid Fuel Stockholding Update 2013: Oil Storage Options & Costs
Page 2
Hale & Twomey: Final Australia's Emergency Liquid Fuel Stockholding Update 2013: Oil Storage Options & Costs
Page 3
Hale & Twomey: Final Australia's Emergency Liquid Fuel Stockholding Update 2013: Oil Storage Options &
Costs
Hale & Twomey: Final Australia's Emergency Liquid Fuel Stockholding Update 2013: Oil Storage Options &
Costs
Hale & Twomey: Final Australia's Emergency Liquid Fuel Stockholding Update 2013: Oil Storage Options &
Costs
Hale & Twomey: Final Australia's Emergency Liquid Fuel Stockholding Update 2013: Oil Storage Options &
Costs
Hale & Twomey: Final Australia's Emergency Liquid Fuel Stockholding Update 2013: Oil Storage Options &
Costs
It is only worth developing underground storage if the facility is of sufficient size. The
IEA note a minimum storage capacity of 1.5 million m3.
In the Asia Pacific region, Korea has rock cavern storage and Singapore is currently
developing a rock cavern storage facility. In Singapores case the incentive is to free
up land currently used for above ground storage. The publically released cost of
developing the Singapore rock cavern has been given as SGD890 million which works
out as USD75-80/bbl (~USD490/m3). This is two to three times higher than the upper
end of the IEA Report estimate. The Japan/Vietnam study paper on floating storage
gives a construction cost for underground cavern storage of USD466/m3 more in line
with the Singapore cost than the IEA Report estimate17.
Product (petrol, jet fuel and diesel) is not usually stored in underground storage due to
the risks with maintaining product quality.
As well as geology there are a number of other issues to consider when using
underground storage including seepage, construction time, percentage of
unrecoverable liquid and the cost of removing the oil. These issues are beyond the
scope of this report and would require specific investigation, particularly the
applicability to Australian conditions.
Hale & Twomey: Final Australia's Emergency Liquid Fuel Stockholding Update 2013: Oil Storage Options &
Costs
Like the estimates in this report the cost estimate assumed a large terminal (about
500,000 m3) specifically developed for emergency storage. They noted that the cost is
significantly less than a small, more complex, distribution terminal as illustrated in the
following chart.
Hale & Twomey: Final Australia's Emergency Liquid Fuel Stockholding Update 2013: Oil Storage Options &
Costs
The IEA report acknowledged that there are likely to be some differences with
emergency storage facilities in Australia18, two of which impact the construction cost.
The emergency storage estimate for large facilities developed for this report is
AUD390-404/m3 (~USD60/bbl), almost double the IEA estimate. The reasons outlined
by the IEA Report explain some of the difference. These and other factors include:
We note that the recent Japan/Vietnam Study (on floating emergency storage) gave a
cost estimate for above ground storage of USD397/m3 (USD63/bbl)19. This means that
the estimate developed for Australia is very similar to estimates developed both in
Japan and the United States for above ground storage, giving a degree of confidence
in the figures.
18 IEA- SEQ (2013)20-Costs and Benefits of Stockholding Final Report. pg. 15.
19 Mitsubishi Research Institute et al, pg. 33.
Hale & Twomey: Final Australia's Emergency Liquid Fuel Stockholding Update 2013: Oil Storage Options &
Costs
Associated Reports
The following list includes all the reports produced by Hale & Twomey (H&T) for the
Department of Industry (formerly the Department of Resources, Energy and Tourism,
or RET) relating to Australias International Energy Agency (IEA) Agreement on an
International Energy Program, along with related reports by H&T and other authors.
This report is highlighted.
Main reports
National Energy Security Assessment (NESA) Identified Issues: Australias
International Energy Oil Obligation (2012 Report)
Australia's Emergency Liquid Fuel Stockholding Update 2013: Australia's
International Energy Agency Oil Obligation. Main Report. (Main Report)
Auxiliary reports
Ticket Markets
Australia's Emergency Liquid Fuel Stockholding Update 2013: Ticket Markets (2013)
Infrastructure - Storage
Australia's Emergency Liquid Fuel Stockholding Update 2013: Oil Storage Options &
Costs (2013)
Australias Emergency Liquid Fuel Storage. Terminal Concept Design and Cost
Estimate. Aurecon. (2013) (also included in the Appendix of the above report)
Infrastructure Refineries
National Energy Security Assessment (NESA) Identified Issues: Competitive
Pressures on Domestic Refining (2012) public report
20 This report was produced jointly for RET and the New Zealand Ministry of Business,
Innovation and Employment.
Hale & Twomey: Final Australia's Emergency Liquid Fuel Stockholding Update 2013: Oil Storage Options &
Costs